Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Version 1
The Texas Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) adopted Guidelines for
residential foundation engineering on October 3, 2002, with an effective date of January 01,
2003. The Section began this work in 1999.
This effort grew out of the response of many Section members to the Policy Advisory issued by
the Texas Board of Professional Engineers (TBPE) in 1998, which addressed residential
foundation engineering. Many ASCE practitioners expressed the opinion that technical
guidelines should more rightly be created by a technical society such as ASCE rather than by
the TBPE. One goal of the guidelines has been to provide the TBPE with guidance in their
evaluation of complaints brought against engineers practicing residential foundation
engineering.
The committees were composed entirely of ASCE members who were licensed engineers.
The dollar value of the professional services donated to the effort is conservatively estimated
to exceed $1,000,000.
The Guidelines are not intended to be Standards, but are guidelines only, reflecting the
engineering opinions and practices of the committee members. They in no way replace the
basic need for good engineering judgment based on appropriate education, experience,
wisdom, and ethics in any particular engineering application. Thus, they are primarily suited as
an aid for and use by engineers.
Members of the Foundation Evaluation and Repair Subcommittee:
1.1 Introduction
The purpose of this document is to provide guidance for engineers practicing in the field
of residential foundation evaluation and repair within the State of Texas with the goal of
protecting the public when obtaining these services. The principal items discussed in this
document are as follows:
1. An introduction presenting the background leading to the need for this document
2. Qualifications of engineers performing evaluations or repair designs
3. Scope of services
4. Methodology
5. Information typically presented in the evaluation report
6. Performance criteria for residential foundations
7. Foundation repair and remedial alternatives
8. Anticipated structure performance after remedial measures
1.2 Background
Texas has large areas with clayey soils that shrink and swell with changes in soil
moisture content. This shrinking and swelling may cause movement of residential
foundations that adversely affects the residence. Other factors may influence foundation
performance. Some of these factors are inadequate design or construction, unanticipated
loads, deterioration of materials, compressibility of the supporting soils, landscaping
practices, leaking plumbing, and slope instability. The American Society of Civil
Engineers, Texas Section (ASCE, TX) developed this document as a guideline for
evaluation and repair of residential foundations. A separate document, Recommended
Practice for the Design of Residential Foundations, also developed by ASCE, TX,
addresses residential foundation design.
1.3 Objectives
The most common purpose of an engineering evaluation of a residential foundation is to
assess its performance. This involves observation and evaluation of cosmetic (non-
structural) distress and structural damage. The evaluation may also provide opinions of
probable causes of distress or damage, assessment of risk of further damage,
- 1 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
1.4 Limitation
These guidelines have been developed by experienced professional engineers and
presents practices they commonly employ to help deal effectively with soil conditions that
historically have created problems for residential foundations in Texas. These guidelines
presume the existence of certain standard conditions when, in fact, the combination of
variables associated with any given project always is unique. Experienced engineering
judgment is required to develop and implement a scope of service best suited to the
variables involved. For that reason, the developers of this document have made an effort
to make the document flexible. Thus, successful application of this document requires
experienced engineering judgment; merely following the guidelines may not achieve a
satisfactory result. Unless adherence to this document is made mandatory through force
of law or by contractual reference, adherence to it shall be deemed voluntary. This
document does not, of itself, comprise the standard of care which engineers are required
to uphold.
- 2 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
- 3 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
3.1 General
The engineer should recommend an appropriate level of investigation to fulfill the
objective of the evaluation. However, the scope of services shall be jointly established
and agreed to by both the client and engineer. The engineer should personally visit the
site and be in responsible charge of the investigative activities. If requested by the client,
the engineer may only provide evaluation of reports by others, but this should be
described as consultation, not investigation. For the purpose of aiding the client in
determining the type of evaluation desired or actually performed, the following three levels
of investigation are offered as guidelines.
3.1.1 Level A
This level of investigation shall be clearly identified as a report of first impressions
and shall not imply that any higher level of investigation has been performed. This
level of investigation will typically include, but is not restricted to:
1. Interview the occupant, owner and client if possible, regarding a history of the
property and performance of the structure
2. Request from the client and review the provided documents regarding the
foundation, such as construction drawings, geotechnical reports, previous
testing and inspection reports, and previous repair information
3. Make visual observations during a physical walk-through
4. Observe factors influencing the performance of the foundation
5. If requested by the client, provide a written report, containing at least the
following:
a. scope of services
b. observations, site characteristics, and data deemed pertinent by the
engineer
c. discussion of major factors influencing foundation performance and
rationale in reaching conclusions concerning the subject residence
d. conclusions and any recommendations for further investigation and
remedial or preventative measures
- 4 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
3.1.2 Level B
This level of investigation should include a written report including the items listed
above for a Level A inspection and also the following items:
1. A determination of relative foundation elevations in sufficient detail to represent
the shape of the foundation or floor adequately.
2. A drawing showing relative elevations
3.1.3 Level C
This level of investigation shall include the items listed above for Level A and Level
B inspections and additional services, testing and related reports deemed
appropriate by the Engineer. These may include, but are not limited to, the
following:
1. Site specific soil sampling and testing
2. Plumbing testing
3. Material testing
4. Steel reinforcing survey
5. Post tensioning cable testing
This level of investigation should also include a more detailed level of reporting,
which may include the following:
1. Scaled drawings
2. Description of factors that affect soil moisture
3. Observations of cut and fill
4. Tree survey
5. Photographs
6. Detailed distress survey
- 5 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
4.1 General
A rational method should be used to establish causes of distress or diminished
performance, if any. A suggested method is summarized as follows:
1. Observe the structure, site conditions, other relevant phenomena, and collect pertinent
data
2. Analyze the data
3. Formulate hypotheses
4. Test the hypotheses using analyses acceptable to the engineering profession along
with engineering experience
5. Reach conclusions or reformulate the hypotheses
4.2 Analysis
Diminished performance of a structure may have several causes. The engineer should
approach the analysis with an open mind. The analysis should follow a logical path to its
conclusion. The evaluation should be quantitative to the extent practical, but should not
assume greater accuracy or precision than warranted by the data.
- 6 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
5.1 General
Residential foundations are expected to remain reasonably flat and level to provide
acceptable performance. The criteria herein are intended to lend rationality and
reasonable uniformity, supported by a consensus of practitioners, to the evaluation of
performance and the need for repair of residential foundations.
The bases of these evaluation criteria are structural integrity (strength) and performance
(serviceability). Both may be affected by foundation deformation and tilt. Evaluations
may be interpreted from the body of evidence or demonstrated by calculations.
- 7 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
5.3 Performance
Performance considers the capability of the building to serve its intended purpose.
Elements of concern are safety, function, durability, and habitability. Inadequate
performance may result from inadequate strength or insufficient stiffness, and is shown in
many ways. Visible indications may include:
1. Cracking or separating of exterior walls
2. Rotating, buckling, or deflecting masonry veneer panels
3. Cracking of concrete foundation elements
4. Cracking of gypsum board walls and ceilings
5. Separating of walls from ceilings or floors
6. Separating of rafters from a ridge board
7. Racking of door and window frames
8. Separating or racking of other structural framing
9. Cracking, buckling, or separating of floor coverings
10. Separating of initially tight joints
11. Deflecting, deforming, or tilting of structural elements
12. Deteriorating materials
Observation of some of the listed conditions does not necessarily imply inadequate
structural performance or insufficient stiffness.
- 8 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
dimension should be considered for each separate foundation element and for the entire
foundation. The amount of overall deflection is measured by the deflection ratio.
Building codes specify that structural members shall be designed to have adequate
stiffness to limit deflections. The International Code Council International Residential
CodeTM for One- and Two-Family Dwellings (IRC) specifies a maximum allowable live
load deflection of L/360. This deflection criterion may be appropriate for the analogous in-
service deflection of a residential foundation due to loading from varying soil conditions.
The maximum live load deflection of a floor is the in-service deflection that typically will
not result in excessive damage to cosmetic finishes.
A single floor level survey yields the shape of the foundation at one instant, and may or
may not furnish sufficient information to support a conclusion. An evaluation may include
repeated floor level surveys performed over months or years. In such cases, the change
in shape is measured between surveys. In addition, previous foundation repairs may
change elevation shapes.
The engineer evaluating deflection must consider the floor level survey (Levels of
Investigation B or C), and other indications of movement, such as:
1. Brick coursing not level.
2. Poor door alignment.
3. Levelness of built in horizontal surfaces, such as cabinets, countertops, sills and trim.
4. Cracking of exterior and interior wall finishes may indicate deflection, as do most items
listed in 5.3 above.
If a foundation profile indicates the deflection is less than the analogous deflection limit of
L/360, it is unlikely the foundation is deflected materially unless visible indications show
otherwise.
If a foundation profile indicates the deflection is more than the analogous deflection limit
of L/360 and minimal symptoms of deflection are present, then additional information is
needed by the engineer to develop a conclusion. The additional information may allow
the engineer to determine whether or not the foundation has deflected excessively.
If a foundation profile indicates the deflection is more than the analogous deflection limit
of L/360 and sufficient symptoms of deflection are present, then the engineer generally
will be justified in determining that the foundation has deflected excessively.
- 9 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
consequences as in Section 5.5, but caution is advised when evaluating floor deviations
over only a few feet because built-in unevenness can dominate.
5.7 Tilt
Foundation tilt can affect structural integrity and performance. Tilt of entire foundations
may be evaluated for structural integrity using the criterion stated for veneer panels, as
discussed in Section 5.2 of this document. This criterion may be found in the 1997
Uniform Code for Abatement of Dangerous Buildings.
Floors may tilt enough to affect comfortable or convenient use of the building. A floor
slope greater than 1 percent is usually noticeable. The Americans with Disabilities Act
considers a 2 percent slope too large.
- 10 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
Section 6. REPORTING
The report provides a record of the investigation, analysis and conclusions. Report formats
may vary, but should contain pertinent information that was obtained or generated during the
investigation. The following list includes items that may be included in a report:
1. Authorization and Scope
2. Property Location and Description
3. Sources of Information
4. Data
5. Assumptions
6. Analysis of Information and Data
7. Conclusions
8. Recommendations
9. Limiting Conditions
- 11 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
- 12 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
- 13 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
- 14 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
7.4.3.1 Underpinning
The plans should show or specify specific locations of underpinning
elements and their sizes, depths, material types, and minimum required
material strengths if appropriate. Underpinning design shall be based
upon generally accepted engineering practice and appropriate engineering
calculations. Performance of underpinning can be compromised by
integrity of existing slab components, changes in soil moisture, skin
friction, point load, and other factors.
- 15 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
- 16 of 17 -
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Repair of Residential Foundations – Version 1
- 17 of 17 -